ArticleInternational journal of mental health nursing2025
Implementation of a Sensory Room in a Psychiatric Intensive Care Unit: A Mixed-Methods Study.
Article in International journal of mental health nursing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Implementation of a Sensory Room in a Psychiatric Intensive Care Unit: A Mixed-Methods Study.International journal of mental health nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Sensory rooms provide a safe space for consumers in inpatient psychiatric settings to self-manage distress and agitation and potentially reduce the use of restrictive practices. However, sensory rooms are often not available, and there is limited knowledge about strategies that support the implementation. This study explored consumer and clinician experiences of a sensory room in an acute psychiatric intensive care unit (PICU) and examined its impacts on restrictive practice use (seclusion and Pro re nata [PRN] medication). A mixed-methods approach was employed in the analysis of interviews with consumers and clinicians and routinely collected data pertaining to restrictive practice use. Themes were generated from the qualitative data through deductive analysis against the Theoretical Domain Framework (TDF) and COM-B to understand the barriers and facilitators to use. Rates of PRN use and seclusion were calculated for three 2-month periods: prior to the implementation of the room and two time points following implementation. Prominent barriers related to limited opportunity to use the room due to the environmental context (room location) and resources (staffing). Facilitators were clustered around consumer and staff motivation to use the room. There were no significant changes in PRN use over time, and while there was a numeric decrease in the use of seclusion, this did not reach statistical significance. In summary, sensory rooms were valued by consumers and most staff and were considered to provide a safe therapeutic space within the often chaotic and complex treatment environment of a PICU. Strategies for successful implementation are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.